From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28759 invoked by uid 1002); 15 Jul 2003 07:16:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 30131 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2003 07:16:58 -0000 From: "Ralph F. De Witt" Reply-To: ralphdewitt@charter.net To: Brandon Low , John Davis Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 00:21:16 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.2 Cc: gentoo-core@gentoo.org, gentoo-dev@gentoo.org References: <20030714214621.33b75fbd.zhen@gentoo.org> <20030715061643.GB8196@lostlogicx.com> In-Reply-To: <20030715061643.GB8196@lostlogicx.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Description: clearsigned data Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200307150021.29302.ralphdewitt@charter.net> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo part II. X-Archives-Salt: a332ebf5-30cb-4e9d-84db-59f4e71497ad X-Archives-Hash: 8d3a172a7ea0482b55430cf9c0783088 =2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Monday 14 July 2003 11:16 pm, Brandon Low wrote: > I agree, we are at a crossroads, but I disagree about which of the many > branches we should follow. I think we have got the management thing > about as big as it needs to be, if we go any further toward managing > things, we're going to lose a lot of what many of us consider what is > GOOD about Gentoo, the FUN, the excitement, the 'cool' factor of being > able to SEE changes help users in almost real time without having to > wade through bullshit to do it. > IMHO I agree. [snip] > > We have the Gentoo Social Contract, that is the only guarantee that any > users should really need, it ensures that if anyone feels that they need > a different structure than what Gentoo currently offers they are free to > fork without retribution, and to have a good tiem doing it. To further > constitutionalize ourselves and turn ourselves into a debian like > monstrosity would not help us but rather hinder us by alienating our > most important asset: our users. These are users who (I would guess) > close to half run ~x86 bleeding edge sometimes broken apps because it is > FUN. These people have NO interest in politics or in the runnings of an > OSS project, they just want to see their favorite apps, and the latest > greatest toys on their desktops NOW, and they will not only help, but > ENJOY helping to fix issues which come up. > IMHO I agree. > > 2. Open voting > > At this point in time, there is no published ruleset for voting, > > and there is no public record of voting results. There is also no offic= al > > published method of calculating a voting quorum. Additionally, with > > regard to the election of new managers, the vote is kept secret. > > > > In order for any democratic system that uses voting to be successful, > > there *must* be accountability, concrete rules, and open results. How c= an > > there possibly be accountability if the results of the vote are kept > > completely secret? The find line between an oligarchy and a > > representative democracy is voting accountability. The developers, > > managers, and uses *must* know that the Gentoo voting process is secure > > in its philosophy and practice. > > > > References: > > http://www.debian.org/vote/ (Voting policy) > > http://www.debian.org/vote/2002/vote_0001 (Sample voting results) > > http://www.debian.org/vote/howto_vote (Sample voting ballot) > Who wants voting. I am more than happy filling a bugzilla request for a app= or=20 a bug fix and seeing it happen almost real time with out some voting=20 processes and having to wait months if it get's enough votes etc. IMHO bad= =20 idea. > Someone else said this, but WE ARE NOT A DEMOCRACY, we are a loosely > conglomorated group of friends and associates with the common goal (and > this is the only common goal we really have) of making Gentoo GREAT, and > that is something I think we are all trying to do, but the problem is > that tryin to turn Gentoo into some kind of socio/political funhouse > ISN'T going allow the free and rapid development that we've been able to > maintain thus far. IMHO I agree. What has let Gentoo become great is that everyone > has been completely free in their 'development time' to do whatever they > feel they need to do to better the distro, yes that meant that many > great projects that had a lot of hours in them got thrown out, but many > others that may never have even been started if everyone was doing > development tasks as assigned have become core aspects of our system. Here Here. IMHO I agree. Let us not turn Gentoo into a Meta Debian distribution. Lets stay near=20 bleeding edge, quick fix time fun distribution. With a structure of our own= =20 design that works for us. =2D --=20 Yours, Ralph. It said Use Windows XP or better, so I installed Gentoo Linux 1.4=20 Register Linux User 168814 ICQ #49993234 AIM ralphdewitt jabber.org=20 ralphdewitt GPG Public Key available at hkp://blackhole.pca.dfn.de Key id =3D 0DE2 085D Kernel version 2.4.20-gentoo-r2 Current Linux uptime: 2 days 23 hours 42 minutes. =2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE/E6t4u29DXA3iCF0RArOdAJ9GIVPBHtH0TWPYmUmMlRdX1axhYQCdHt83 tCjH7pSNcx6J0irtbP2+Tpg=3D =3DaHiQ =2D----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list